HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION; KOSOVO AND LIBYA IN PERSPECTIVES

Abstract

Humanitarian intervention, as embedded in the just war doctrine is quite fascinating and frustrating due to multi-disciplinary perspectives. A review of the interventions executed by NATO on Kosovo in 1999 and Libya in 2011 could be said to have been born from humanitarian concern, but the study shows skepticisms as to the rationale of military force against civilians in a bid to counter human rights violations. Realism posits that intervention undermines the most elementary foundation of international order of Westphalian norm. The Idealists’ argument shows otherwise, that sovereignty of states is not absolute and intervention is not a new form of ‘western colonialism’ but it is allowed on the grounds of preventing grave human right abuses, whether inter or intra-state. It was discovered that the interventions failed as anchored on the R2P doctrine; the reviewed interventions could be said to portray political undertone of self-interest with a propensity by super-powers to maintain a status-quo for domination effect, masquerading as humanitarianism at the expense of genuine world peace. It was submitted that there were glaring hegemonic tendency in the both interventions as they failed to explore other viable means to have averted the conflicts, rather, they escalated civilian unrest as intervention is only one of the three international responsibilities of building the political, social, economic, military and legal conditions necessary for the protection of human rights. It was recommended that the right toward prevention and the responsibility to rebuild should be given most priority.